With Cycling Sponsorships, the Risk Is All Relative

Lars Seier Christensen, co-founder and chief executive of Team Saxo Bank, explains his support for Contador and continued sponsorship of cycling.james starttFebruary 16, 2012

Photo by Lars Seier Christensen, right, says that from a marketing point of view, support for Saxo Bank and Alberto Contador, center, has been "rather sensational." In January, Contador received a two-year suspension from racing for a doping offense he committed at the 2010 Tour de France. (James Startt)

Paris, Feb. 16, 2012 (Bicycling.com) — Ever since the Festina Affair in 1998, cycling has been continually crippled by doping scandals, yet still many sponsors remain committed to the sport. In recent weeks, doping-related cases have again made headlines. Perhaps the most controversial of them is the two-year suspension handed to Alberto Contador for his doping offense during the 2010 Tour de France. In his native Spain, Contador’s suspension was met with street demonstrations and even a hunger strike; in France, his team's title sponsor, Saxo Bank, took out large ads in newspapers in support of the Spaniard.

Lars Seier Christensen, Saxo Bank’s co-founder and chief executive, spoke this week with Bicycling about how the Danish investment bank has decided to handle the latest crisis concerning its star rider.

Bicycling: Are you a cyclist or a fan of the sport?

Lars Seier Christensen: I’m a fan but not a cyclist myself.

Bicycling: Saxo Bank invested in the sport primarily for business reasons, presumably because the sport assures the visibility you’re looking for.

Christensen: Yes, absolutely. It’s a big sponsorship, as you know, and we just couldn’t justify that sort of expense from any other point of view. We enjoy the sport, but our involvement is primarily commercial. We first got involved with Riis Cycling in 2008 as a secondary sponsor, and then when CSC decided to pull out we decided at the end of the year that it was the right moment to get more involved.

We’re very international but also very much Danish, and that corresponds well with the team; it’s a good match. We have a small but important group of clients around the world, and it’s not easy to reach them. We were looking at things that would get us out broadly around the world, and there just aren’t many ways to do that in sports outside of an absolutely top football club or perhaps Formula One.

Bicycling: When Cofidis got into the sport over 15 years ago, it did a marketing study with Saatchi & Saatchi. The result was that pro cycling provided some of the best visibility for the investment. Is that still the case?

Christensen: Yes, it’s still true. In terms of cost per eyeball, it’s still the best deal around. That is perhaps to some extent a discount for the risks involved, which is something we have just experienced firsthand.

This French ad reads, "Opportunities Often Come After a Crisis."

Bicycling: You inherited this last case with Contador, since his positive test for clenbuterol occurred before he signed with your team. Do you feel as if the Contador case has hurt your brand’s image? I remember during the Festina Affair in 1998, the company said that its numbers actually increased. Never before had it sold so many watches.

Christensen: Well, I don’t think it’s damaging the visibility or perception, and, yes, we do gain visibility one way or another. In addition, there’s a lot of sympathy for our team and for Alberto around the world as a result of this case. Obviously there is a wealth of sympathy and support in Spain, where we have an important office. So, from a marketing point of view, our support has been rather sensational. OK, certainly the visibility and sympathy is not coming from the way that you would prefer it. But actually, I don’t think there’s a negative connotation to it, because the advantages of support and loyalty to the team and rider place quite well with people who are interested in the sport.

If there’s one point I’d like to make, though, it’s that we would not be so supportive if we didn’t believe that Contador was innocent. If we had any inkling that there was deliberate cheating, we would not be out there doing this. It’s very important for us that CAS (the Court of Arbitration for Sport) recognized that the clenbuterol traces likely came from food contamination. It’s an interesting system where a person is punished for something he didn’t actually do deliberately; but those are the rules and that’s the way it is. It’s critically important for us that we believe that this was an involuntary intake of this substance, and we’re very pleased that CAS confirmed that. That really is an important distinction, and we’d never have run any ads or anything if we didn’t think so.